TenQ:

What do you suggest or think?
Is it different from the principles you know?

I suggest you are misunderstanding and misrepresenting what you are attempting to talk about and that is why you cannot point out the principles.

I already directed you to find out what space means in mathematics, now I will also add that you find out what dimension means in physics. Those 2 taken together will help you better understand the topic.

LordReed:


I suggest you are misunderstanding and misrepresenting what you are attempting to talk about and that is why you cannot point out the principles.

I already directed you to find out what space means in mathematics, now I will also add that you find out what dimension means in physics. Those 2 taken together will help you better understand the topic.

LOL!
So you believe your misdirections will bail you out of your predicament! SMH!

In your ignorance, you think that dimensions or space mean different things in mathematics and physics! SMH!

What are the principles you know?

No wonder you are coming up with nonsensical questions like:
Show me the philosophical principles that deal with n-dimensional space ?

TenQ:

LOL!
So you believe your misdirections will bail you out of your predicament! SMH!

In your ignorance, you think that dimensions or space mean different things in mathematics and physics! SMH!

What are the principles you know?

No wonder you are coming up with nonsensical questions like:
Show me the philosophical principles that deal with n-dimensional space ?

LoLz. Thank you for proving you truly are ignorant of what you are trying to discuss. Yes space in mathematics and dimension in physics are 2 different things. You would have known that if you even bothered to educate your ignorant self.

You were the one sounding all high on your ignorance talking about philosophy and with a simple question showed yourself to be nothing but the loud empty barrel.

Educate yourself just a little, I have shown you a glimpse. Don't remain ignorant.

LordReed:


LoLz. Thank you for proving you truly are ignorant of what you are trying to discuss. Yes space in mathematics and dimension in physics are 2 different things. You would have known that if you even bothered to educate your ignorant self.

You were the one sounding all high on your ignorance talking about philosophy and with a simple question showed yourself to be nothing but the loud empty barrel.

Educate yourself just a little, I have shown you a glimpse. Don't remain ignorant.

Please, Professor LordReed,
Teach us the difference between space and dimensions in physics and mathematics?
SMH!


Correction please:
Space and Dimensions both exist in physics and mathematics! I don't know where you got this from professor of physics and mathematics

TenQ:

Please, Professor LordReed,
Teach us the difference between space and dimensions in physics and mathematics?
SMH!


Correction please:
Space and Dimensions both exist in physics and mathematics! I don't know where you got this from professor of physics and mathematics

LoLz! You r brain must still be booting, where did I say Space and Dimensions doesn't exist in both?

LordReed:


LoLz! You r brain must still be booting, where did I say Space and Dimensions doesn't exist in both?

Read the highlighted in yellow!

TenQ:

Read the highlighted in yellow!

You read it.

LordReed:


You read it.

SMH!
You got nothing meaningful to say so, have a nice day!

TenQ:

SMH!
You got nothing meaningful to say so, have a nice day!

Yes go continue to bask in ignorance. Bye.

LordReed:


Yes go continue to bask in ignorance. Bye.

I'll like you to read this book if you can

Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions"
It is a satirical novella written by Edwin A. Abbott

TenQ:

I'll like you to read this book if you can

Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions"
It is a satirical novella written by Edwin A. Abbott

I'd like you to Google 'Dimension in Physics' but I am sure you'd rather bask in ignorance.

1. Just as it looks like foolishness to a person who lives in a 2D world comprehending descriptions of the 3D world,
So also
It looks like foolishness to Atheists who lives in the 3D world comprehending descriptions of the spirit realm.


2. Just as a person who lives in a 2D world would ask stupid questions with respect to the 3D world,
So also
Atheists who lives in the 3D world will ask stupid questions with respect to the spirit realm.


3. Just as it is IMPOSSIBLE for a person who lives in a 2D world to objectively comprehend issues with respect to the 3D world,
So also
It would be IMPOSSIBLE for Atheists who lives in the 3D world to comprehend issues with respect to the spirit realm.


Knowing God is a subjective experience!
Any God that can be brought into the Laboratory of the 3D space is an idol.

TenQ:
1. Just as it looks like foolishness to a person who lives in a 2D world comprehending descriptions of the 3D world,
So also
It looks like foolishness to Atheists who lives in the 3D world comprehending descriptions of the spirit realm.


2. Just as a person who lives in a 2D world would ask stupid questions with respect to the 3D world,
So also
Atheists who lives in the 3D world will ask stupid questions with respect to the spirit realm.


3. Just as it is IMPOSSIBLE for a person who lives in a 2D world to objectively comprehend issues with respect to the 3D world,
So also
It would be IMPOSSIBLE for Atheists who lives in the 3D world to comprehend issues with respect to the spirit realm.


Knowing God is a subjective experience!
Any God that can be brought into the Laboratory of the 3D space is an idol.

Ok we've heard. Thank you.

LordReed:


Ok we've heard. Thank you.

LOL!
Message passed!

Question the limitations of the 3D world!

TenQ:

LOL!
Message passed!

Question the limitations of the 3D world!

Find out the meaning of dimension.

LordReed:


Find out the meaning of dimension.

Question the limitations of the 3D world!

I think from my writeup, except you are pretending, you know exactly the kind of dimensions I speak about!

TenQ:

Question the limitations of the 3D world!

I think from my writeup, except you are pretending, you know exactly the kind of dimensions I speak about!

Show me the science that backs up the dimensions you speak about.

LordReed:


Show me the science that backs up the dimensions you speak about.

Since you think it is science, you may wish to help me out!
If you cannot read and follow: you are beyond help!

Cornered and now looking for technicalities!
SMH!

TenQ:

Since you think it is science, you may wish to help me out!
If you cannot read and follow: you are beyond help!

Cornered and now looking for technicalities!
SMH!

Oh I forgot we are using a satirical work of science fiction as our textbook. Silly me asking for scientific evidence when we are discussing science fiction. LoLz.

TenQ:
I love your honesty in answering all my questions. I can only add my conclusion on the responses.

Of course it is impossible to be unequivocally sure that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe because, even if it exists, there is no way we can be sure.

Exactly. I love the bolded statement.

The implication is that the best an atheist can be is Agnostic. Atheism is the end of the spectrum of certainty.

It also raises an issue, being Agnostic isn't a position of knowledge: it is a position of choice not to be bortherd with true reality.

I'm not sure I'd say agnosticism is a choice to not be bothered by reality. As an agnostic, the possible answers to questions like gods or higher dimensions do bother me.

But I also understand that there's a number of forms these answers could take, and I'm not too eager to choose one over the other in the lack of reasonable evidence. And that doesn't even take into account the fact that the answers to these questions could be something completely different from what we could possibly fathom.

Check out the Satirical novel, Flatland!

"A Square" to the rest look insane, Unfortunately, he's the only one with the experience of lineland and spaceland.

I didn't know there was a novel. I once watched a video where the late Carl Sagan described flatland in an attempt to explain a possible 4th dimensional object (a tesseract). Perhaps I'll check out the novel.

In theory, the experiment should work as lost energies can be assumed to have entered the higher dimensions. In practice, I don't think any scientist have been able to demonstrate higher dimensions experimentally. I sometimes wonder if this elusive factor is not what we insert into our equations as CONSTANTS.

I agree with you!
If scientists in the 2D space have perfect scientific knowledge of their space, their knowledge will NOT be adequate in the 3D space?

My inference:
Knowledge of a higher dimension can only be subjective. There is no way of successfully bringing it into the Laboratory for examination. Concluding that a higher dimension doesn't exist based on the observations from the current lower dimension is a folly


Perfectly said.

A 3D personality can be completely be OUTSIDE the 2D space and he can also enter it or stand on it. Those in 2D may see only his cross-section presented to them as 2D.

Two parallel 1D or two Parallel 2D planes would be completely invisible to each other because of the nature of their constraints. (I'm not sure how a 3D space can relate to themselves in this same manner)


But I think I like this your description below.


I like this your example:
All lower dimensions may just be living in constraints within the higher dimensions. It reminds me of the scripture

Acts 17:27-28:
"That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being ; .... For we are also his offspring."

I honestly think this is the real meaning of dimensions where 0 D, 1 D, 2D and 3D are not stand-alone dimensions but are sunsets of the higher dimensions.

Well said

LordReed:


Oh I forgot we are using a satirical work of science fiction as our textbook. Silly me asking for scientific evidence when we are discussing science fiction. LoLz.

You are just being a clown: acting silly because he doesn't want to face the issue on ground!

TenQ:

This is the simplest within our reality as
1. Infinite regress of cause and effect is impossible

I actually used to agree with this before. But after trying to study the nature and meaning of infinity, I've become a bit more on the fence here.

But that being said, even if infinite regress is impossible, there's still every possibility that the alleged gods could have their own gods, leading up to the 5th, 6th, or even 20th dimension. But like you said earlier, there's simply no way for us to know. [/quote]

2. Except if everything is like fractals: the more you look, the more you see! LOL!
The factor of infinity between one dimension and the next dimension is particularly interesting.

It truly is.

Just some thought Questions (has nothing to do with spiritualism)
If a 1D line space is curved into 2D plane, would the objects within even know that they have traversed a movement in 2D?
Or a 2D plane curved into a circle, would the objects within even know that they have traversed a movement in 3D?

In most cases, I don't think so. I want to use the example of a 2-d plane, or what you'll call flatland.

I believe for something to truly be 2d, it must not have any height. The inclusion of height just makes it a very, very incredibly short 3-d object.

If the 2d object cannot have any concept of height, then the object itself must have no height. Like a stain on a piece of fabric or something. It's existence lies completely within the boundary of the fabric.

If that's the case, then regardless of how a 2d plane is curved into 3d, the 2d object would not notice. It could observe that it arrives at it's starting point after traveling in a straight line after a long period of time, but i feel like it would consider that more or less a sort of maze, than to actually notice the curve in the 2d plane.

But again, that's just my theory. I could be wrong.

Also, it does lead to an interesting question. What if the 2d object is actually just a 3d object with an incredibly tiny and unnoticeable height? I think that just makes things really interesting.

Must spatial dimensions always be an integer?

Oh.. now this is even more complex. It's insane to think that there could be a 2.5d dimension. I admit. My human brain stops functioning just thinking about it.

Wilgrea7:

Exactly. I love the bolded statement.

I meant:
Of course it is impossible to be unequivocally sure that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe because, even if it exists, there is no way we can be sure using the information available to our senses. It takes only the being in the higher dimensions to make us enter the knowledge of his dimension.
In other words , such knowledge will remain perpetually SUBJECTIVE!

The implication is that their is no physical instrument in our dimension that will be useful to proving or disproving the higher dimensions.

Wilgrea7:

I'm not sure I'd say agnosticism is a choice to not be bothered by reality. As an agnostic, the possible answers to questions like gods or higher dimensions do bother me.

But I also understand that there's a number of forms these answers could take, and I'm not too eager to choose one over the other in the lack of reasonable evidence. And that doesn't even take into account the fact that the answers to these questions could be something completely different from what we could possibly fathom.

Unfortunately, the default of Agnostics is that they do not have enough compelling physical EVIDENCE of the existence of the higher dimensions hence it is outrightly REJECTED.
Are Agnostic seeking or they have concluded?

Wilgrea7:

I didn't know there was a novel. I once watched a video where the late Carl Sagan described flatland in an attempt to explain a possible 4th dimensional object (a tesseract). Perhaps I'll check out the novel.

Well said

You can use ChatGPT to summarise the story. Just type the prompt:
Summarise the Novel Flatland by Edwin A. Abbott.
You may not need to read the whole novel.


Someone asked the Question:
Can something be created out of Nothing?

When the question is rephrased in a 2D space, the answer becomes very clear. Nothing in 2D space means absence of things in this space. It objects in 3D space will be completely invisible as long as there is no intersection of their plane of existence with the object. When an object in 3D space is brought into the 2D plane, there is a sudden appearance (to them, a creation from Nothing).

Rom 4:17:
"(As it is written, I have made you a father of many nations, ) before him whom he believed, even God, who vivifies the dead, and calls those things which be not as though they were."

Let there be Light, and there was Light!

TenQ:

I meant:
Of course it is impossible to be unequivocally sure that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe because, even if it exists, there is no way we can be sure using the information available to our senses. It takes only the being in the higher dimensions to make us enter the knowledge of his dimension.
In other words , such knowledge will remain perpetually SUBJECTIVE!

Yes, but here's the thing. I feel like a 2-d object, even if taken out of it's current subsection of 3-d reality, would still only be able to experience a 2d subsection of 3d reality, albeit another one. A true 2d object IN the surface of a cube can be moved to another surface, but i doubt its senses would permit it to experience 3d reality. it would have to somehow be transformed into a 3d object first.

The implication is that their is no physical instrument in our dimension that will be useful to proving or disproving the higher dimensions.

True

Unfortunately, the default of Agnostics is that they do not have enough compelling physical EVIDENCE of the existence of the higher dimensions hence it is outrightly REJECTED.
Are Agnostic seeking or they have concluded?

I don't think any agnostic holds the position that they have "concluded" that gods or higher dimensions do not exist. Although I'll say i can only speak for myself.

I'm more than open to the idea of gods, or higher dimensions existing as people have defined them. But in the absence of evidence, I simply do not subscribe to the position that these things do exist. Although I'm not also saying that these things CAN'T exist. I'm just saying due to the lack of evidence, I'm not convinced that they do.

Imagine this scenario. Imagine 2 entities in flatland. I'll call them A and B. A says to B that their world, flatland is in a 3-d space called an office, and it is surrounded completely by yellow indescribable shapes.

Could he be right? Absolutely. But he could also be wrong. their flatland could be at the bottom of the ocean, or a room where nothing is yellow. In the absence of tangible evidence, it doesn't make much sense to believe one claim over the other.

You can use ChatGPT to summarise the story. Just type the prompt:
Summarise the Novel Flatland by Edwin A. Abbott.
You may not need to read the whole novel.

Thanks. I will do that.

Someone asked the Question:
Can something be created out of Nothing?

When the question is rephrased in a 2D space, the answer becomes very clear. Nothing in 2D space means absence of things in this space. It objects in 3D space will be completely invisible as long as there is no intersection of their plane of existence with the object. When an object in 3D space is brought into the 2D plane, there is a sudden appearance (to them, a creation from Nothing).

Of course I completely agree with this. It was one of the possible theories I thought about in relation to what happened at the big bang. It's an interesting concept to think about. But I'm afraid it once again falls into the category of things we don't know yet

Rom 4:17:
"(As it is written, I have made you a father of many nations, ) before him whom he believed, even God, who vivifies the dead, and calls those things which be not as though they were."

Let there be Light, and there was Light!

Wilgrea7:


I actually used to agree with this before. But after trying to study the nature and meaning of infinity, I've become a bit more on the fence here.

But that being said, even if infinite regress is impossible, there's still every possibility that the alleged gods could have their own gods, leading up to the 5th, 6th, or even 20th dimension. But like you said earlier, there's simply no way for us to know.

So many things point in this direction in our physical realm
+The Law of Entropy forbid infinite regress of cause and effect
+ The natural laws have not always existed
+ Matter had not always existed

Even if their are higher dimensions, the Creator Himself must be the Highest so that everything/other dimensions exist only in Him.

Wilgrea7:

2. Except if everything is like fractals: the more you look, the more you see! LOL!
The factor of infinity between one dimension and the next dimension is particularly interesting.

It truly is.

Agreed!

Wilgrea7:

Just some thought Questions (has nothing to do with spiritualism)
If a 1D line space is curved into 2D plane, would the objects within even know that they have traversed a movement in 2D?
Or a 2D plane curved into a circle, would the objects within even know that they have traversed a movement in 3D?

In most cases, I don't think so. I want to use the example of a 2-d plane, or what you'll call flatland.

I believe for something to truly be 2d, it must not have any height. The inclusion of height just makes it a very, very incredibly short 3-d object.

If the 2d object cannot have any concept of height, then the object itself must have no height. Like a stain on a piece of fabric or something. It's existence lies completely within the boundary of the fabric.

If that's the case, then regardless of how a 2d plane is curved into 3d, the 2d object would not notice. It could observe that it arrives at it's starting point after traveling in a straight line after a long period of time, but i feel like it would consider that more or less a sort of maze, than to actually notice the curve in the 2d plane.

But again, that's just my theory. I could be wrong.

I think you have said it perfectly.
The only thing is that if the 1D space is within a force field like gravity. The person in this dimension will treat every change as an anomaly.

Wilgrea7:

Also, it does lead to an interesting question. What if the 2d object is actually just a 3d object with an incredibly tiny and unnoticeable height? I think that just makes things really interesting.

Must spatial dimensions always be an integer?

Oh.. now this is even more complex. It's insane to think that there could be a 2.5d dimension. I admit. My human brain stops functioning just thinking about it.

It is incredible seeing that even though we know so much, we are still limited by the spatial dimension through which we are constrained.

There is nothing that says non integer dimensions could not exist. Impossible to visualize yet it could lead to a destroying of the very foundation of our basic sciences.

Wilgrea7:


Yes, but here's the thing. I feel like a 2-d object, even if taken out of it's current subsection of 3-d reality, would still only be able to experience a 2d subsection of 3d reality, albeit another one. A true 2d object IN the surface of a cube can be moved to another surface, but i doubt its senses would permit it to experience 3d reality. it would have to somehow be transformed into a 3d object first.

Christians have always thought that a human being is a Trinity of
A Body: Which is the physical biological self
A Soul: Our Consciousness defined by our Will, Emotion and Intellect
A Spirit: Which is the component of our being able to interact with the higher dimensions eg God. The only thing is that we all were born with a defective Spirit (like in comatose)

Each of these component is fully US in three different dimensions.
-With our Body, we interact with the Physical Environment
-With our Spirit, we interact with the Spiritual Environment
-With our Soul, we interact with our Internal/Personal Environment

With our Spirit, we have
1. Conscience: Innate ability to distinguish between write and wrong, good and evil.
2. Intuition: Spontaneous knowledge/awareness which has nothing to do with learning or processing

Why all these background?
Depending on how damaged or healthy our spirit is, we are made available to the spirit environment good or bad.


In other words, even though you are correct in your submission, it is not impossible to interact with the higher spiritual dimensions. Unfortunately, it is ALWAYS at a subjective level

Wilgrea7:

True
I don't think any agnostic holds the position that they have "concluded" that gods or higher dimensions do not exist. Although I'll say i can only speak for myself.

I'm more than open to the idea of gods, or higher dimensions existing as people have defined them. But in the absence of evidence, I simply do not subscribe to the position that these things do exist. Although I'm not also saying that these things CAN'T exist. I'm just saying due to the lack of evidence, I'm not convinced that they do.

Imagine this scenario. Imagine 2 entities in flatland. I'll call them A and B. A says to B that their world, flatland is in a 3-d space called an office, and it is surrounded completely by yellow indescribable shapes.

Could he be right? Absolutely. But he could also be wrong. their flatland could be at the bottom of the ocean, or a room where nothing is yellow. In the absence of tangible evidence, it doesn't make much sense to believe one claim over the other.

This is exactly the Problem:
An Agnostic is first an atheist looking for a TANGIBLE evidence (usually physical evidence)

This is not impossible, but not everyone is given the favour. Many Atheists for instance has abandoned atheism because they had a compelling Near Death Experience (NDE). Unfortunately , even this is a SUBJECTIVE experience of the person who had the NDE.

Even without any compelling experience, logic tells me that the multilayers of interdependent SYSTEMS that make up our existence as the apex biological being cannot be a spontaneous accident which just happened to evolve us and Programmed every thing.

Wilgrea7:

Thanks. I will do that.

No problems: fastest way to read a book.
LOL!

Wilgrea7:

Of course I completely agree with this. It was one of the possible theories I thought about in relation to what happened at the big bang. It's an interesting concept to think about. But I'm afraid it once again falls into the category of things we don't know yet

There are too many things the limitations of our 3D spatial dimensions will not allow us to know. The statistical odds of a planet like earth is staggering to say the least.
The statistical odds (in 3D) for the Programming of Living things is impossible.

It's like saying, given several sets of the complete alpha numeric characters AND an infinite number of times to randomly juggle them up, is it possible to arrive at the complete C/C++ code with required header to print on a VDU "Hello World!"?
Even if it is possible, the code is not useful until there exists a language Interpreter or Compiler.
+Our DNA is such a complex code complete with its compiler/interpreter
+Our Soul is such a complex code complete with its compiler/interpreter

It is impossible for me to think that thede all happened by accident: I point to One higher than my Dimension as the author.

TenQ:

You are just being a clown: acting silly because he doesn't want to face the issue on ground!

What is the issue on ground? The fact that you can't produce any scientific or philosophical backing or the fact that you are using a satirical work of science fiction as your textbook. LoLz.

TenQ:

Proving that you didn't even read a thing.


No one has argued reality or otherwise!
You have been given p
PHILOSOPHICAL questions to ponder on!

“Zero Dimension is just an infinitesimally small point within a 3D space. A person within a zero Dimensional space is static and he would believe he's alone in the whole universe. Words like velocity, distance, Area, Volume or Space would be nonsensical to him.”

If there’s no dimension there can’t be matter hence there can’t be a person.

Maynmann:


“Zero Dimension is just an infinitesimally small point within a 3D space. A person within a zero Dimensional space is static and he would believe he's alone in the whole universe. Words like velocity, distance, Area, Volume or Space would be nonsensical to him.”

If there’s no dimension there can’t be matter hence there can’t be a person.

Using your argument, matter can only exist in 3D, therefore even the hypothetical person in 1D or 2D cannot even exist!

LordReed:


What is the issue on ground? The fact that you can't produce any scientific or philosophical backing or the fact that you are using a satirical work of science fiction as your textbook. LoLz.

Since it seem you are incapable of doing some "thought experiments" , what do you expect us to do?
Please, go Work on your capabilities dude!
It's just a function of your IQ!

Sorry!

TenQ:

Since it seem you are incapable of doing some "thought experiments" , what do you expect us to do?
Please, go Work on your capabilities dude!
It's just a function of your IQ!

Sorry!

LoLz. What is the point of a thought experiment built on misunderstanding?

LordReed:


LoLz. What is the point of a thought experiment built on misunderstanding?

Sorry bro: it's not my fault you cannot cope!